Program Information
Optimized Respiratory Gating for Abnormal Breathers in Pancreatic SBRT
W Campbell*, M Miften, T Schefter, K Goodman, B Jones, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO
Presentations
TH-CD-207A-4 (Thursday, August 4, 2016) 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM Room: 207A
Purpose: Pancreatic SBRT is uniquely challenging due to both the erratic/unstable motion of the pancreas and the close proximity of the radiosensitive small bowel. Respiratory gating can mitigate this effect, but the irregularity of motion severely affects traditional phase-based gating. The purpose of this study was to analyze real-time motion data of pancreatic tumors to optimize the efficacy and accuracy of respiratory gating, with the overall goal of enabling dose escalated pancreatic SBRT.
Methods: Fifteen pancreatic SBRT patients received 30-33 Gy in 5 fractions on a Varian TrueBeam STx unit. Abdominal compression was used to reduce the amplitude of tumor motion, and daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were acquired prior to each treatment for target localization purposes. For this study, breathing data (phase and amplitude) were collected during each CBCT scan using Varian’s Real-Time Position Management system. An in-house template matching technique was used to track the superior-inferior motion of implanted fiducial markers in CBCT projection images. Using tumor motion and breathing data, phase-based or amplitude-based respiratory gating was simulated for all 75 fractions, targeting either end-exhalation or end-inhalation phases of breathing.
Results: For the average patient, gating at end-exhalation offered the best reductions in effective motion for equal duty cycles. However, optimal central phase angle varied widely (range: 0-92%, mean±SD: 49±12%), and phase-based gating windows typically associated with end-exhalation (i.e., “30-70%”) were rarely ideal. Amplitude-based gating significantly outperformed phase-based gating, with average effective ranges for amplitude-based gating 25% lower than phase-based gating ranges (as much as 73% lower). Amplitude-based gating was consistently better suited to accommodate abnormal breathing patterns. For both phase-based and amplitude-based gating, end-exhalation provided significantly better results than end-inhalation.
Conclusion: Amplitude-based gating reliably outperformed phase-based gating, and end-exhalation was more suitable than end-inhalation. These results will be used to guide future dose-escalation trials.
Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: Research funding provided by Varian Medical Systems to Miften and Jones.
Contact Email: